2010 (7) TMI 430 - HC - Central Excise

Interest Cenvat credit wrongly availed Reversal of credit without utilization - assessee had maintained sufficient balance in its Cenvat Credit account which was much higher than the wrongly availed credit which showed that the wrongly availed Cenvat Credit was not utilized at any stage Assessee not required to pay interest on wrongly availed credit on its reversal

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to Tribunal's order on payment of interest under Rule 14 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004.

Analysis:
The appellant-revenue contested the Tribunal's order questioning the requirement to pay interest when Cenvat credit was wrongly taken, citing Rule 14 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The audit revealed instances where the respondent availed Cenvat credit on capital goods not used in manufacturing finished goods and on invalid documents. The adjudicating authority ordered payment of interest under Rule 14 and Section 11AB of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The Commissioner (Appeals) reversed this order, noting the respondent maintained sufficient balance in their Cenvat Credit account during the relevant period, indicating the wrongly availed credit was not utilized. The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner's findings, emphasizing that the utilization of Cenvat Credit is a question of fact. The Tribunal's decision was based on concurrent factual findings by both appellate authorities, with no evidence presented to challenge these findings. Consequently, the Tribunal's decision did not raise any legal questions for review, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.

In summary, the dispute centered on the requirement to pay interest on wrongly availed Cenvat credit under Rule 14 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The audit revealed instances of improper credit utilization, leading to the adjudicating authority ordering interest payment. However, the Commissioner (Appeals) and the Tribunal found that the wrongly availed credit was not utilized based on the maintained balance in the Cenvat Credit account. The Tribunal's decision was upheld as it relied on factual findings and did not warrant legal intervention.